The effects of global warming on people — and on the world’s largest publicly traded petro-product company — took up most of the discussion at today’s annual Exxon Mobil shareholders meeting in Dallas.

Most shareholder-initiated resolutions related to climate change failed. One passed, calling for creating a new path for shareholders to nominate candidates for the board of directors. CEO and chairman Rex Tillerson gave no ground during discussions and questions from shareholders about the company policy about climate change. Which took up most of the discussion and questions.

But climate change wasn't just a topic pushed by a few shareholders. Even the company’s prepared presentation devoted considerable time to the topic. It made the case that Irving-based Exxon is doing what it can to reduce the risk of climate change. Nothing in the presentations expressed any skepticism that the planet is getting warmer and that burning carbon fuels has an effect.

But how big is the risk? How should Exxon respond to that risk? Those are the areas where environmental advocates and the company continue to divide.

The nonbinding shareholder resolutions included:

• To require a division between the jobs of CEO and chairman. The climate change link for advocates was to give the CEO more time to work on how the company should respond. 38.8 percent voted yes.

• To require the board to have at least one expert on climate change. 20.9 percent voted yes.

• To require the company to pay higher dividends because climate change would lower the value of Exxon assets. 4.1 percent voted yes.

• To require the company to produce an annual report assessing the potential financial impact of changing government policy and demand for oil on gas. 38.2 percent voted yes.

• To commit the company to work to limit global warming to a total of 2 degrees Celsius. 18.5 percent voted yes.

The one that passed, with 61.9 percent of the vote, would put Exxon where most other large publicly traded companies have already gone, said Dennis McCuistion, director of the UT Dallas Institute for Excellence in Corporate Governance. Offering a way for shareholders to nominate directors is not a radical new idea.

The resolution that passed for Exxon would allow anyone who has owned three percent of Exxon stock for three years to nominate a candidate for the board. Partly, it's a symbolic change. After all, nomination is not the same as election. But a shareholder with three percent of Exxon stock would get attention by sending up a nomination, McCuistion said.

"The fact that someone owns that much stock and they see, in their opinion, a change needs to be made, it could be more than symbolic," he said. "A lot of other shareholders might fall in line if there are challenges."

A similar resolution last year fell just short of a majority of Exxon shareholders. The tie to climate change? Supporters said it would be one way to advance nominees to the board whose position on how the company should react to global warming would be different from the current members.

While the official business proceeded inside the Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center, protesters and speakers outside railed against the company and its polices.

On the plaza across the street from the center, protesters placed a sign that read "We could've prevented this if Exxon had not lied," in front of an ice sculpture as it melted away in the heat.

Local activist groups partnered with 350.org and other national organizations to call out Exxon for what they said was deception and to show shareholders that Exxon will not change its business model. Activist speakers included Anna Kalinsky, the granddaughter of former Exxon climate scientist James Black.

Kalinsky talked about how her grandfather told Exxon about how burning fossil fuels were causing carbon dioxide levels to rise around the planet and the risks of climate change in 1977.

“Instead of working to address climate change, they invested in lobbyists and groups that contradicted the very science that my grandfather had warned them about,” she told the crowd.

A few minutes later, she told the same story inside the hall during discussion of the shareholder resolutions.

While most of the speakers were critics of Exxon’s policies, most of those in attendance were solidly behind the company. After Tillerson delivered a resolute response to a climate change scientist, the room erupted in applause.

The company chairman repeated the official position that the risk of higher temperatures is important but that the biggest energy supply for the foreseeable future will be fossil fuels. Exxon, he said, was committed to producing those fuels in the most environmentally responsible manner and in researching alternative technologies that would reduce carbon emissions.

“We are grounded in the world we live in today and the technology we have available to us today,” Tillerson said.